Cybersecurity and Risk Management in the Era of Globalized Hybrid Digital Threats: The case of Critical Infrastructure protection in the European Union

Michail Nikolaou, Hellenic Open University – University of the Peloponnese, Post-Graduate Student, MSc in Global Challenges and Analytics, E-Mail: std535046@ac.eap.gr / michael.nikolaou00@hotmail.com

Evangelos Manouvelos, Hellenic Open University, Collaborating Teaching Staff, E-Mail: manouvelos.evangelos@ac.eap.gr

Summary

World Economic Forum’s Global Risk Report for 2025 has underlined “Cyberwarfare and Cyberespionage” as one of the main challenges to the world order. Within this context, the purpose of this paper is to analyze the topic of Cybersecurity from a Risk Management approach, which emphasizes on the protection of critical infrastructure of the European Union.

Cybersecurity is regarded as an ambiguous term, as a result of its highly sensitive nature as a special aspect of security. In an era of high levels of globalization and unprecedented advances in digital technologies, attacks against digital systems encompass serious risks for states, organizations and societies. This paper analyzes the concept of cyberattacks, while at the same time illustrating EU’s institutional policy framework regarding cybersecurity.

By utilizing PESTLE analysis critical potential threats stemming from cyberattacks targeting EU’s systems are being identified. Whether aiming for the interception of political-economic information or towards the disruption of EU’s digital systems of communication, transportation, health and educational services, cyberattacks pose serious threats for numerous domains of the public sphere. Rising levels of digitalization augment these risks, while increasing interconnectivity can multiply cyberattacks’ final imprint, by expanding their impact to more actors.

After the identification of numerous potential threats, risks are further analyzed qualitatively, with references to historical events and different cases of cyberattacks, as presented in academic and specialized technological organizations’ literature. This qualitative assessment serves as the basis for calculating their Probability and potential Impact score, enabling them to then be ranked and categorized in three groups of priority, high-medium-low priority.

Following this classification, three different scenarios are presented, with each one portraying different hypotheses regarding on the one hand EU’s cyberdefense capabilities and structural power and on the other hand third states’ hostility and cooperation, leading to different results for EU’s cybersecurity. Hence, while the Baseline scenario presumes that EU’s states deepen further their cooperation regarding cybersecurity, creating synergies that enhance their defense capabilities towards limited and uncoordinated attacks, the Adverse scenario assumes limited intra-European cooperation and enhanced foreign capabilities, resulting towards more successful cyberattacks with considerable impact. Finally, the Severely Adverse scenario further develops the Adverse one, presuming that the serious imbalance of cyber capabilities against the EU leads to numerous and large-scale cyberattacks against its critical infrastructure. For each scenario, risk management strategies are proposed, strategies ranging from risk deterrence and avoidance to risk reduction and transfer.

The analysis concludes by underlining the need for the promotion of cybersecurity within the European framework to a matter of critical importance for the security and prosperity of member-states and the Union itself. With the risks identified looming and the technology constantly upgrading, along with the capabilities of hostile actors, the European Union has to act for the protection of its interests.

Keywords: Cybersecurity, Risk Management, European Union, PESTLE Analysis, Scenario analysis

JEL Classification Codes:

H12 – Crisis Management

F68 – Economic Impacts of Globalization: Policy

D81 – Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

O33 – Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

F52 – National Security; Economic Nationalism